Trump Lawsuit Sparks Debate on Wrongful Convictions and Racial Injustice

Judge with gavel, scales, and open book.

President Donald Trump faces a continuing legal challenge as a federal judge denied his bid to dismiss a defamation lawsuit brought by the “Central Park Five,” men who were wrongfully convicted of a 1989 rape and later exonerated.

Quick Takes

U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone ruled that the defamation lawsuit against Trump can proceed, denying his motion to dismiss.
The lawsuit stems from statements Trump made during a 2024 presidential debate where he falsely claimed the men pleaded guilty and killed someone.
The “Central Park Five” were wrongfully convicted of a 1989 rape, served prison time, and were fully exonerated in 2002.
Trump’s legal team argues the lawsuit is a meritless attack on free speech and plans to continue fighting the case.

Judge Allows Lawsuit to Proceed

U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone has rejected President Donald Trump’s attempt to have a defamation lawsuit dismissed that was filed by five men who were wrongfully convicted in the infamous 1989 Central Park jogger case. The judge determined that Trump’s statements about the men could be “objectively determined” to be false, providing grounds for the lawsuit to continue. The ruling marks another legal challenge for Trump, who has faced multiple lawsuits in recent years. The case will now move forward with the plaintiffs having the opportunity to amend their complaint.

The lawsuit specifically addresses comments Trump made during a presidential debate with former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. During that exchange, Trump allegedly falsely claimed that the men had pleaded guilty and that they had killed someone. These statements form the basis of the defamation claims, as the men were fully exonerated in 2002 after another individual confessed to the crime, and DNA evidence confirmed his guilt. The case has remained a controversial topic in American discussions of racial justice and wrongful convictions.

President Trump must face Central Park Five defamation suit, judge rules https://t.co/f3BiJTawpM

— The Hill (@thehill) April 10, 2025

The Central Park Five Case Background

The case dates back to 1989 when five teenagers – Korey Wise, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson, and Antron McCray – were wrongfully convicted of attacking and raping a white female jogger in Central Park. The young men, who were Black and Latino, spent between 6 and 13 years in prison before being exonerated in 2002 when the real perpetrator confessed and DNA evidence confirmed his guilt. The case has since become a prominent example of wrongful convictions and racial disparities in the criminal justice system.

Trump’s involvement with the case began in 1989 when he took out full-page newspaper advertisements calling for the return of the death penalty during the initial investigation. Despite their exoneration, Trump has maintained his position over the years, refusing to acknowledge their innocence. The men, now sometimes referred to as the “Exonerated Five,” have pursued various civic and political roles since their release, with Yusef Salaam now serving as a New York City Council member. The group previously received a $41 million settlement from New York City.

Legal Arguments from Both Sides

Trump’s legal team has vigorously opposed the lawsuit, arguing that it represents an attack on free speech rather than a legitimate legal claim. His attorney, Karin Sweigart, called the lawsuit “baseless” and “politically motivated,” suggesting it violates Pennsylvania’s anti-SLAPP law designed to protect free speech. While the judge dismissed some claims in the case, Trump’s legal team believes the entire suit should have been thrown out and has pledged to continue fighting.

During the 2024 presidential debate that sparked this lawsuit, Trump defended his past statements about the case, saying, “They admitted – they said, they pled guilty. And I said, well, if they plead guilty they badly hurt a person, killed a person ultimately.” This statement contradicts official records, as none of the five men were accused of or convicted of murder, and all convictions were vacated when they were exonerated. Judge Beetlestone pointed to these factual discrepancies in allowing the case to continue.